Page 468 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 17 February 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I think the reference to leaving no-one behind is interesting when we think about some of the key issues facing Canberra. Let us think about the Mr Fluffy problem. Where have the Canberra Liberals been in helping ensure the government does the responsible thing by dealing with it head on once and for all and ridding this city of the toxic legacy that we have inherited? This is a necessary program for all Canberrans. It removes the spectre of loose-fill asbestos for residents, homebuyers, tradespeople, carers and neighbours. The territory government has been required to incur the full net cost of the scheme. Sure, we got a loan from the federal government for a billion dollars, but we have had to go it alone, despite the commonwealth promising to pay two-thirds of the cost, without real financial support from the federal Liberal government—unless you count loaning us $1 billion that we also have to pay interest on. That really is not the sort of thing we would expect for such a major issue affecting so many people in our city.
When it comes to community services we have seen some terrible policies coming from the federal government over the past few years which have meant serious cuts to the community and environment sector, such as housing and homelessness policy and advocacy peak bodies, environment groups and peak bodies as well as community legal centres. These are all the critical services that either help the most vulnerable people in our community or protect the environment. What we have seen is ideologically driven cuts from the Liberal Party’s colleagues on the hill. It is all about undermining the provision of those services. I do not think that is about focusing on better outcomes for all Canberrans; that is about undercutting the services that help the most vulnerable in our community.
Of course, the motion today finishes—as everything does these days—by creating a dichotomy between what the people of Canberra want in pursuing light rail. That is how the Liberal Party see this; they see it as an absolute dichotomy. I think this morning’s radio discussion was an interesting one and showed how the Canberra Liberals are being left behind on this issue. We know the majority of Canberrans support the project and are now getting excited by the prospect of it coming soon. We heard that today in the discussion about the proposed development of Manuka Oval. There is going to be a lot of discussion about that project, but what was interesting was hearing people say, “Well, we’re going to need to get light rail there so that we can provide the transport to support and sustain such a large project.” I think that reflects the fact that the community understands that you need to invest in good transport infrastructure as our city grows and as the population grows.
The Canberra Liberals are totally off the mark with their view of the car-dominated Canberra of the future. You can ask Canberrans how they think transport infrastructure should be spent—and this work has been done independently—and they say the majority of it should go to public transport, then to cycling and walking infrastructure. Infrastructure for cars comes last. That is what the public say when they are asked. Investing in these sustainable transport infrastructures is also the responsible thing to do.
I should quickly turn to issues of environment and climate change. We heard Mr Hanson say this morning that he has a commitment to making it easier to develop.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video